A Serious Look Inside Computer Delivered Interventions (CDI) for College Students: Part II

This post continues a review of the chapter entitled, “Computer Interventions” by Campbell & Hester in the text, College Student Alcohol Abuse: A guide to assessment, intervention, and prevention. As you likely quickly surmised when reading, “Part I” of this review, I found this chapter provocative, informative, and a “must read” for the contemporary student affairs professional and administrator in higher education.

Perhaps this chapter’s greatest significance, at least in this reviewer’s opinion, is a brief section of the article entitled, "commercially available CDIs: summary of empirical findings” (p.260-261) that follows 10 pages of descriptions of each program and a review of their evidence of effectiveness. In this short three-paragraph section we find both a frank review of the limitations of CDI programs as well as an admonishment of caveat emptor and “buyer beware.” As effective as CDI's may be, they are not a panacea for high-risk and dangerous collegiate drinking. Ironically, some CDIs with the greatest price tags and longest completion times perform less effectively then less expensive, briefer programs. More isn't necessarily better. But one point the authors make is that more research on CDIs is necessary, as some have not even received a rudimentary review regarding their effectiveness.

In summarizing this chapter, there are four key points:

1. Most agree that CDI holds great potential for use with heavy drinking collegians. Conversely, they are relatively ineffective at motivating overt change in the drinking behavior of a low-risk, moderate drinking population.
2. Although empirical evidence is available on some CDI programs, this is neither definitive nor universal as regards the different programs that are available.
3. Empirical data that are available on CDI programs result from traditional controlled experiments. It is unknown if the plethora of digital competitors for college student interest will affect either student attention when engaged in a CDI program in a nonclinical environment, i.e., college residence halls, or if its impact will be diminished by other distractions in a controlled, nonclinical environment.
4. Further study is needed to explore adjuncts to simple completion of CDI programs in order to facilitate retention and/or application. For example, involving students in more traditional means of considering the information to which they have been exposed. Further examples include, various means of recording the feedback received from CDI programs and/or literally reading a summary of feedback or information provided by a CDI program.

Recommendations to the field

1.  That administrators employ CDI programs to pursue NIAAA recommended means of intervention with collegians.
2.  That CDI programs be readily available to students by strategically deploying computers with access to such programs to implement a stepped–care approach to campus-wide intervention and prevention.
3. That administrators be mindful of the importance of using CDI programs that students will want to use—the best program will have little impact if students find it tedious, burdensome to use, or simply “not fun.”
4.  That administrators remain mindful of "where" the CDI program will be available. For example, providing for access in controlled, quasi-anonymous environments like classroom buildings, clinical settings, and the like.

Prophesying About the Field

The authors conclude their chapter by prophesying regarding the coming decade. Although it is worth the time to read their complete predictions about the future of CDI programs in their entirety, a preview of their prognostication is warranted:

1.  CDI will continue to improve in scope, in its ability to deliver interventions, and ability to engage collegiate users.
2. CDI programs are in their infancy. As such, they have yet to incorporate all we have learned about effective intervention strategy and traditional face-to-face interventions. In short…stay tuned.
3. The marriage of CDI programs and online social media will likely resemble the proverbial match made in heaven.
4. Merging text messaging capabilities with alternative low-risk collegiate behavior—think "Arab Spring meets Spring Fling.”
5. As smart phones have done to cellular telephones, imagine what CDI will do for interventions with a prevention of high-risk and dangerous collegiate drinking…not to mention other behaviors.
6. Biosensors in cell phones, innovative smartphone apps, perhaps even sensors embedded in clothing able to deliver real-time blood-alcohol level data to gauge personal risk.

In 21 short, easily read pages, including references (three pages) Campbell and Hester have managed to review the role of CDI programs as well as their utility in addressing high-risk and dangerous collegiate drinking. They do this while providing the field with a detailed road map through the commercial minefield of available computer delivered interventions targeting heavy drinkers. This chapter is definitely recommended as a “must read” for any serious student affairs professional or administrator in higher education.

This has been a review, in 2-parts, of “Computer Interventions,” authored by William Campbell and Reid Hester, (chapter #10, pages 246 – 267, in College Student Alcohol Abuse: A guide to assessment, intervention, and prevention, Christopher Correia, James Murphy, and Nancy Barnet editors, copyright 2012, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, N.J. ).

What do you think?
Dr. Robert